Ropes & Gray DQ'd in Calif. Case After Ignoring Client Ultimatum

"An attorney cannot just ignore his or her client and then assume that the client terminated the relationship," U.S. Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Corley wrote in an order disqualifying Ropes & Gray from a false advertising suit.

Here’s Ropes & Gray’s side of the story: The firm spun out its patent prosecution practice to a stand-alone firm, Haley Guiliano, in June. A Guardant attorney had warned that if Ropes & Gray senior counsel James Haley didn’t finish an opinion letter by May 1, 2017, Guardant would have to find new counsel. When Haley didn’t respond, that confirmed that the attorney-client relationship was over, Ropes & Gray argued in its brief opposing the DQ motion.

Corley did not agree. “An attorney cannot just ignore his or her client and then assume that the client terminated the relationship,” she wrote in a Nov. 6 order. “This is grounds for referral for disciplinary action, not grounds for deeming the attorney-client relationship over.”

Guardant is a biotechnology company that specializes in DNA sequencing and cancer diagnostics, according to Corley’s opinion. The company acquired a patent, No. 7,700,286, on blood-based “liquid biopsies” and began prosecuting a new version known as a continuation. Guardant’s outside counsel at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati were having trouble getting the continuation approved, so Guardant added Haley and Ropes & Gray to the team. The retention letter included a potential appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and, if unsuccessful, to the Federal Circuit.

Ropes & Gray’s engagement letter stated that representation will end “when we have completed our work on the matters for which you have engaged us, or when either of us informs the other that the representation has ended,” including by presentation of a final bill.

Guardant and Ropes & Gray got into a dispute over a bill that went over budget, and Ropes & Gray agreed to allocate some of the overage to future work on a 2016 PTO hearing and an opinion letter. In the meantime, FMI had sued Guardant for patent infringement in Texas. FMI was an existing Ropes & Gray client, though a different firm represented FMI in the Texas case.

From January through April 2017, Guardant attorney John Storella pressed Haley for the opinion letter. “Please confirm that you can provide Guardant with an opinion letter by May 1,” he wrote on April 1. “If not, I’ll have to find another firm to work on it.”

Ropes & Gray had already announced it was exiting the patent prosecution business. In June it entered its appearance for FMI in the Guardant false advertising action. Six days later Ropes & Gray announced that Haley would form Haley Guiliano. “Although there were news articles to this effect, there is no evidence regarding how this information was communicated to clients or Guardant,” Corley wrote.

The continuation patent application remains pending at the PTO, she wrote, and appeals remain a possibility, so the work described in the engagement letter hasn’t ended, Corley wrote.

Ropes & Gray argues that Guardant sought disqualification to deprive FMI of knowledgeable counsel just as Guardant was moving to enjoin FMI from telling oncologists that Guardant’s product is inferior.

Appeals aren’t part of the representation any more because the resolution of the fee dispute narrowed the scope of representation to the PTO hearing and the opinion letter, Ropes & Gray argued. By not responding to Storella’s email by May 1, Ropes & Gray was “discharged” from further representation, the firm argued in a filing signed by Ropes & Gray general counsel Eric Hubbard.

Corley found that the email outlining the fee resolution was sufficient. “The email identified particular work to be performed for a particular price,” she wrote, and “does not suggest that this is the only work Ropes & Gray would perform.”

“If Ropes & Gray intended to terminate its representation,” she added, “it needed to affirmatively withdraw from representation by sending a disengagement letter, final bill, returning Guardant’s file or more informally through a follow-up email or phone call. Absent its doing so, its representation continued.”

Guardant was represented by James Murphy and Geoffrey Macbride of Murphy Pearson Bradley & Feeney and Saul Perloff of Norton Rose Fulbright US.

Scott Graham

Scott Graham focuses on intellectual property and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. He writes ALM's Skilled in the Art IP briefing. Contact him at sgraham@alm.com.

The raw statistics of affirmed Section 101 rejections may make appealing a Section 101 rejection seem like somewhat of a hopeless endeavor. But in reality, the chances of successful a Section 101 appeal can be significantly increased with the right preparation

Three Israelis, along with a U.S.-based accounting firm and attorney, agreed to a settlement and disgorgements totaling nearly $2 million.

Featured Firms

Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone

2 Oliver St #608

Boston,
MA02109

857-444-6468

www.marksalomone.com

Gary Martin Hays & Associates
P.C.

235 Peachtree St NE #400

Atlanta,
GA30303

800-898-4297

www.garymartinhays.com

Smith & Hassler

225 N Loop W #525

Houston,
TX77008

(877) 777-1529

www.smithandhassler.com

Presented by BigVoodoo

More from ALM

Premium Subscription

With this subscription you will receive unlimited access to high quality, online, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry. This is perfect for attorneys licensed in multiple jurisdictions or for attorneys that have fulfilled their CLE requirement but need to access resourceful information for their practice areas.

Team Accounts

Our Team Account subscription service are for legal teams of four or more attorneys. Each attorney is granted unlimited access to high quality, on-demand premium content from well-respected faculty in the legal industry along with administrative access to easily manage CLE for the entire team.

Bundle Subscriptions

Gain access to some of the most knowledgeable and experienced attorneys with our 2 bundle options! Our Compliance bundles are curated by CLE Counselors and include current legal topics and challenges within the industry. Our second option allows you to build your bundle and strategically select the content that pertains to your needs. Both option are priced the same.

From Data to Decisions

Exclusive Depth and Reach.

Legal Compass includes access to our exclusive industry reports, combining the unmatched expertise of our analyst team with ALM’s deep bench of proprietary information to provide insights that can’t be found anywhere else.

Big Pictures and Fine Details

Legal Compass delivers you the full scope of information, from the rankings of the Am Law 200 and NLJ 500 to intricate details and comparisons of firms’ financials, staffing, clients, news and events.

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters.
Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss.
Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.